Oh, good god, my connection dies just as I posted. So please forgive any mistakes on this second attempt!
joe92 wrote:Bromley, you've stated something as fact which is not only unverifiable but from my interactions with the world is wrong.
It's not unverifiable, but it may be wrong.
If you can provide the independent sources which prove the statistical analysis to back up this wild claim I'll back down. I can say that because I know you won't find a single source. From my experience I have found that Palestinian's do not hate Israeli's more than Israeli's hate Palestinian's. Both sides are pretty equal in that. Palestinian's do hate the Israeli government though (note the difference between government and people), but who could blame them given the years of apartheid?
Regarding textbooks, 49% of Israeli textbooks were negative, compared to 84% of Palestinian ones. As you'd expect, the hard-line, Orthodox Jews, were far more hateful than the average, but at 73% they still couldn't muster the hate that the standard Palestinian texts had. Of course, what is a childish mind without a teacher? I've no direct knowledge of what the Israeli or Palestinian teachers are like.
This chap, who as a Gazan is entirely qualified to express an opinion on Palestinian ones, doesn't think highly of them (he doesn't think highly of Israeli ones either, but he couldn't know that from direct experience).
Also, apartheid? Try being a Jew in the Occupied Territories. How does that compare to being an Arab in Israeli proper?
On the topic of targeting. Hamas can fairly be compared to the IRA. They are a terrorist organisation fighting for in their minds nationalistic reasons. It can be said that Hamas do want to kill Israeli's.
Duh! Oh, but didn't they change their charter, so it's all okay now?
Corbyn would be an absolute god send for the middle east. A politician who wants peace, rather than to profit from war. How much influence and success he would have is a matter in it's own right, but at last having a leader of one of the richest countries in the world striving for peace in the middle east would be a positive change.
Are you suggesting that previous PMs (and Presidents), with the possible exception of Bush Jr, have been pro-conflict in the Middle East? They sell arms to the ruling parties, not to factions, and they'd all have liked the pre-2011 status quo to have remained. If he does nothing, he's an irrelevance, so I assume you'd be hoping for a BDS movement? That's not the same as taking a neutral stance.
Certainly, it sucks to be a Jew in Labour at the moment.
The Arab spring. Interesting you would use that as an argument against Corbyn considering he voted against arming rebels in Syria and voted for a no-fly zone in Libya. You can view his
voting record if you like. If he had been in power for the past 7 years the world might be a very different place now.
You mean he voted against the Libya no-fly zone, but your point is well made. Certainly, that should endear him to me, as (a) clearly getting involved in Syria would be stupid, unless you were going all-in, and (b) Libya would be a better place for Europe, and I suspect Libya, if Qaddafi was still in power.
However, I believe he was also against attacking IS. That's really the key point. Whether or not the various incursions were sensible, attacking IS is. Libya, I can see both sides. Syria, a little less so. A murderous regime that hates everyone, them I'm happy to see helped to martyrdom.
EDIT: Removed overly argumentative point.